Is Hillary imploding?

posted at 8:01 pm on June 18, 2014 by Allahpundit

Keep hope alive, says Jonathan Last. Not only has she been gaffe-ing up America’s airwaves — the “dead broke” remark, that gay-marriage meltdown interview with NPR, and some offhanded inanity about how smart the Russian reset was — but it’s all been happening against a backdrop of fiasco for American foreign policy.

How’d you like to be a former Secretary of State running on this record?

Obama — perhaps you’ve heard this? — got bin Laden. But other than that, his foreign policy record is disastrous: Libya, Egypt, Syria, the South China Sea, Crimea, Iraq, Afghanistan. It is difficult to find a spot on the globe that is better off today than when Obama took office. And yet Obama’s foreign policy is the only entry of substance on Hillary Clinton’s resume right now. Which means it will carry double the weight.

For Obama, Putin and Crimea are a mid-size political problem, ranked somewhere above the Keystone pipeline. For Clinton it’s an existential problem because foreign affairs are the only measures for her basic professional competence.

Think about it from the perspective of a Democratic voter: Hillary Clinton was wrong on Monica Lewinsky during the (Bill) Clinton years, wrong on gay marriage and Iraq during the Bush years, and now wrong on Putin and Syria and Egypt and the whole of American foreign policy during the Obama years. What has she ever been right on? And if you’re a Democratic voter, at some point you start to wonder, Can’t we do better?

Do you? Go watch this clip before you answer. My trust in the commentariat’s ability to gauge which gaffes are truly damaging among average voters and which aren’t is down to zero at this point, and yeah, I certainly include myself in “the commentariat.” The ultimate example of this, I think, is Obama’s “you didn’t build that” line during the 2012 campaign. Conservative media blew up over it, me included, to the point where it became a key theme at the GOP convention. Voters didn’t care, though, because most voters aren’t “builders.” They’re wage-earners. You could crap on entrepreneurs all day and they wouldn’t flinch, although it’d probably convince the Chamber of Commerce to pause from its amnesty campaigning for five minutes to write a check to your opponent.

My hunch is that nothing Hillary’s said this week has reduced her chances. It takes a big gaffe to register with average voters, and that gaffe has to reveal some perceived “deeper truth” about the candidate to have legs, I suspect. That’s why Romney’s “47 percent” comment outgrew the punditocracy and actually penetrated the electorate. It seemed to confirm the sense of him as a country-club Republican who looked down on the lower class. There’s potential, I guess, for Hillary’s “dead broke” comment and her stupid whining about how “brutal” American politics is to make her seem “out of touch,” but never forget that she’s got Bill around to give her a shot of blue-collar appeal when needed. If her last name weren’t “Clinton,” you might have something in drawing her as the consummate limousine liberal. As it is, I think it’s a glancing blow, nothing more, especially if the GOP ends up supporting the “out of touch” attack by, er, nominating a guy named Bush. As for the gay-marriage interview, it’s hard for me to believe liberals are going to give her too hard a time over any heresy knowing how difficult it is for a party to win the White House for three consecutive terms. Iraq is the perfect example. Her vote to invade helped Obama pull the upset in 2008, but no one thinks it’ll keep her from the nomination now. She’s clearly the strongest candidate Democrats have in an extremely difficult political climate. They’ll be prudent in deciding how severely to punish her for deviations from orthodoxy.

As for foreign policy, everything Last said is true — it looks like O’s going to toss her the keys to an agenda that’s been completely totaled. But … since when do voters elect presidents based on foreign policy? The only clear example I can think of recently is 2004 and it took 9/11 to make that happen. Even in 2008, when Obama ran as the anti-Bush and the GOP nominated the hawk di tutti hawks, McCain was competitive until the bottom dropped out on Wall Street. Unless Rand Paul shocks everyone in the primaries, the next Republican nominee is likely to run to Hillary’s right on foreign policy, which will set her up nicely to run a “no more Iraqs” campaign. (Repudiating her own vote for war will also rally the left.) That strategy might not work as well as it did in 2008, but barring any major terror attacks on the U.S., it’ll work well enough to neutralize most of the GOP’s foreign-policy criticism, especially if the economy picks up a bit in 2015-16 and gives her something else to talk about. You have two big problems running against her and neither has anything to do with the finer points of foreign policy. One: How do you neutralize Bill’s popularity? She’s going to run on his economic record, not O’s, and he’s going to help her — a lot, I’ll bet — with blue-collar voters. She may be a bad retail politician but he’s an exceptional one, and he’ll be campaigning as much as she will. What do you do about it? (Start by nominating a conspicuously blue-collar yourself, I’d guess.) Two: How do you neutralize the “it’s time for a woman” argument? That argument doesn’t depend on who’s gaffed worst or who was really responsible for security at the Benghazi consulate. My hunch is that the GOP will start this campaign with a single-digit lead among men and Hillary will start with a double-digit lead among women. Either we build heavily on the former or reduce the latter or we lose. Is the “dead broke” thing or Ukraine going to help do that?

Update: Tough but fair.

Does it matter whether Hillary is imploding when the GOP's big idea is a man in a squirrel suit?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Hillary is the nominee should she so desire. However, there is a significant percentage of that small group ‘in the middle’ that sways elections that simply doesn’t like her. Add to that her ego which will keep her from ever allowing a vice presidential nominee that has any real appeal, and the Republicans may have a shot at beating her.

The real dilemma for the Republicans is picking someone that won’t make the likes of me stay home … cuz I ain’t voting for the Republican version of Hillary ever again.

Still does not matter. Mitt was correct. 47% , (and growing) of the folks are on the government teat. The libs can run a ham & cheese sandwich and still bet the Republicans. All they need is 4% of the dead folks and illegal aliens to add to their base, and they win.

This is all assuming that there even is an election in 2016. My hunch is that we will be under martial law at that time, and Barack will have made himself our president ‘indefinitely’. Y’all heard it here first…

bimmcorp on June 18, 2014 at 9:04 PM

I use to think that as well but with current events (all of the scandals) obaME will not be able to get that on. The blood in the streets would be too much to let that happen. Ted Cruz is the R’s best bet, see NV election in 2010 results from Wayne Allyn Root.

It’s probably moot. My hunch is she won’t run. Obama has two more years to keep screwing the pooch and he can do a lot more damage. Think of how bad Iraq, Libya and Syria will be in 2 years time; Afghanistan will begin its descent into chaos; Russia will still be dogging Barry, etc. Then there’s the anemic economy. If the debt bubble bursts or we sink into a recession, it’ll be tough for any Dem to win, Killary included.

Well, I hope you are right, Rick…But the blood on the streets will be the reason for the martial law, I think. Why else does the BLM, FDA, IRS, DHHS, and DHS have billions of rounds of ammo to go with all those military grade weapons and armored vehicles? Why do you think the big push is on for gun registration and restriction? I see the writing on the wall, and it is written in Farsi.

Im sitting on a dock in Seattle watching people bike, ride, walk their dogs, drink a beer and other wise go on about their day. These big GAFFES are only big to people who make money off of political programming and those that spend hours of their day on political message boards. Wether youre a righty or lefty this is still a very small percentage of people. Nothing shes doing now is going to matter come November. Remember how many doom and gloom pieces you guys wrote about Obama?

One would hope this American Idol presidency will finally rid us of just any candidate being voted in based upon a first or because he/she is deserving of it. I remain pessimistic though.

If and when 51% of our populace proves they deserve the right to vote, because theirs was an informed, weighted, and rational choice, then there’s hope.
If it’s Hillary in 2016, American Idol returns for its 3rd season.

My guess is that the minions who love free lunches, abortion and gay marriage have not the slightest idea what the responsibilities of the Secretary of state are. Those that do will vote for their Godless liberal hedonism and government sponser4ed parasites anyway.

I think a large portion of the black population stays home if the Dems don’t nominate another of their own. Sad but true.

The Dems are playing a dangerous game with identity politics.

TarasBulbous on June 18, 2014 at 10:07 PM

I have to agree. After The Most Precious why would they vote for a fat old white woman that has led a life of white privilege?

She is all that Barry has taught his acolytes to hate.

slickwillie2001 on June 18, 2014 at 10:16 PM

Awesome points.

The Dems are going to try like mad but they’re not likely to get the black vote in the numbers they did before. Are they likely to make up those numbers in any other group with Hillary? Will that many white women, for instance, cross over from McCain/Romney to Hillary…? I don’t see it. Huh.

The GOP needs to educate people as to why conservatism works. So far, they are doing a terrible job of it.

Of course, it doesn’t help that the nominees for the last few cycles have all been Dem lite themselves.

cat_owner on June 18, 2014 at 9:18 PM

Your first sentence and last sentence get to the heart of the matter. With the exception of a few social issues (the bitterness of the debate on those topics masking their relative unimportance), most of the GOP leadership subscribes fully to the Democratic model of governance (FDR domestic policy and Wilson foreign policy). In fact, if you want to sum up the GOP campaign message in a longish bumper sticker it would read: “VOTE GOP: WE’LL RUN THE WELFARE STATE MORE EFFICIENTLY”.

As for the typical “conservative” voter, how many of them are really “benefits for me, but not for thee” types? There’s a gentleman in my GOP group that rails bitterly against entitlements, but always adds, “Social Security is not an entitlement because I paid into it.”

However, there is a significant percentage of that small group ‘in the middle’ that sways elections that simply doesn’t like her.

M240H on June 18, 2014 at 9:08 PM

I’m going to disagree with your analysis. I don’t think the “small group in the middle” sways elections any longer. I think Obama has shown that it is appealing to, and firing up, your base that wins elections at this point. Republicans are TERRIBLE at appealing to their base. In fact, the GOPe takes about every opportunity possible to persuade people like myself to sit it out by acting as a Dem-lite alternative on subjects such as amnesty (too many GOPe are for it), a balanced budget (too many GOPe are more than happy to expand the federal government, as in the prescription drug benefit of Bush), etc.

If they lose the White House in 2016, it won’t be loss of ‘the middle’ that does it, but pissing off their base.

Politicos, here is correct, I just checked the local media and not one word about the IRS mess, very little about Iraq, and Nothing of the gaffes of HIllaery. Most people I talk to are not even aware of some of the major Obama scandals. Anyone notice that Bob Beckle calls the scandals “mistakes” and only Watergate and the Reagan trading arms for hostages real scandals?

Hillary is not imploding, nor is she exploding, nor is she inevitable, nor is she irrelevant. If she is the Dem candidate in 2016, her fate depends entirely on who the GOP runs against her. If it is another establishment squish/fool she wins, and the country will suffer greatly. If it is a strong conservative she loses in a landslide. It’s all up to the Republicans. Hillary is a completely known quantity.

Right now Ted Cruz would pulverize Hillary in a one-on-one. Not even close.

If a woman is to be president it can’t simply be the only woman available, she needs to actually be GOOD for the country no matter what side of the isle she wants to eat…I mean sits on.

Hitlery is not good for the country, she’s not a good anything. Never has been, never will be. If liberals don’t realize that another me me me limousine liberal will hurt their cause, they deserve to see thunder thighs go down in flames. Perhaps they need to think about what a republican house, senate, and whitehouse is going to do to their beloved pet issues because they wanted another ‘first’. The last ‘first’ didn’t do anyone any good, liberals included. Everything obama has done will be wiped away like mud on a windshield once the scumbag is gone.

Even democrats want an America, not ‘this used to be America, now it’s north latin america’.

Just what we need Golda Meir with a facelift. I’m sick of looking at this, sick of opening a page to Hot Are and being presented with six photos of Hillary and Hot Air’s fascination with her, sick of reading about her, sick of hearing her. I’m sick to death of her and her whole family. I’m beginning to fell the impulses felt during the French Revolution and finding them worthy, and beginning to see the benefit of guillotine. You see, it ends it once and for all with indisputable finality.